Nuclear Discussion - Nukkad Thread: 25 Apr 2008

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

Gerard wrote:
Brajesh Mishra has said not signing it would be a "severe loss of face" for India.
What nonsense is this? Since when is India pre-occupied with silly Han notions of 'face' ?
What do you expect, after all MMS "promised" to deliver. And like another PM he may loose more than just a face, IF he does not deliver this deal.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

Don’t mind nuke test, if voted to power: Advani
If voted back to power, the BJP would not shy away from conducting a fresh round of nuclear tests, party leader and prime ministerial candidate LK Advani said on Sunday.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

Katare wrote:
NRao wrote:I hope I am not duplicating anything:

Ashok Parthasarathi :: The 123 doesn’t add up
This is good example of journalistic dishonesty, ideological blind spot or benign ignorance. :shock: All those 23 countries are signatory to NPT/CTBT and India is not. US domestic law doesn’t allow president to sign 123 deals with countries like India. The Hyde act is the whole reason we want the deal.
Lest we forget (Just BTW, I did not slide the author's name for kicks):
Katare wrote: Although his and most other folk’s criticism of language, restrictions, spirit and tone of hyde act has some truth and should be considered a valid criticism. Hyde act should have been written better but unfortunately it reflects current US congress/senate both of which are filled with pro-NPA and politicians shaped in the era of cold war with.
From this report (prepared for the US Congress no less), the following:
On page 2 wrote: On July 18, 2005, President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed a joint statement that announced the creation of a “global partnership,â€
Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Post by Tilak »

Katare wrote:Tilak,

US-Israel agreement is about ‘safety’ only while 123 agreements are about trade and transfer of technologies. In Israel’s case no nuclear material, manufacturing processes/technologies or equipments will be traded/transferred. The agreement is for only safety related data between two specific institutions in Israel and USA. Israel has a similar agreement already in existence with IAEA and this new agreement is in full compliance with existing CTBT/NPT etc laws. If you read those laws you’ll find that all those laws provide exemptions where physical safety is involved. Russia and others have used those exemptions to help India for long.
U.S. Deeply Regrets Russian Shipment of Uranium Fuel to India
U.S. Deeply Regrets Russian Shipment of Uranium Fuel to India


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
February 16, 2001

Statement by Philip T. Reeker, deputy spokesman

RUSSIAN SHIPMENT OF LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FUEL TO INDIA

We deeply regret that the Russian Federation has shipped nuclear fuel
to the Tarapur power reactors in India in violation of Russia's
nonproliferation commitments.

As a member of the 39 nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, Russia is
committed not to engage in nuclear cooperation with any country that
does not have comprehensive International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

safeguards on all its nuclear facilities. Although India's Tarapur
reactors are under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards
,
India does not have such safeguards on all of its facilities and is
indeed pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

At a December 2000 meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the
overwhelming majority of the members expressed their strong concerns
about Russia's planned shipment of nuclear fuel to India, which they
regarded as inconsistent with Russia's commitments.


We join other nuclear suppliers in calling on Russia to cancel this
supply arrangement and live up to its nonproliferation obligations.

Russia's disregard of its Nuclear Supplier Group commitments, together
with its sensitive nuclear assistance to Iran, raises serious
questions about Russia's support for the goal of preventing nuclear
proliferation.

Russia's provision of sensitive technologies to other countries will
be an important item on the U.S.-Russian agenda of the Bush
Administration.
Dimona(NNRC) is not an IAEA safeguarded facility, so where does IAEA/"safety" come in ?
The agreement in no case legitimizes Israel’s clandestine nuclear program while a 123 with India gives us a legitimate international standing with a defacto NWS status.

They are not comparable deals neither comparable countries.
Katareji

I don't agree with the word "legitimate", when India actually hasn't signed anything (NPT, CTBT, FMCT). So the term is inapplicable IMO. If it is "illegitimate" why do we have IAEA safeguarded facilities (neither have we withdrawn any such) ?. Deriving benefits by signing-up is a different issue all together, as the P-5 have put next to nothing under safeguards.

Let me put it this way, if indeed India were to sign up to this deal, it still is a "de-facto" nuclear state and will remain so, and no so-called "legitimacy" (in the true sense) will be accorded. So Indian's hollering about "achieving legitimacy" is for domestic consumption, the litmus test for it will be the upcoming GNEP.. And Bush is on record saying India will not be considered "legitimate".
Last edited by Tilak on 28 Apr 2008 10:35, edited 2 times in total.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

boy.. advani has really used the blast word wherever tests could be used.. he is on a beligerent mode... further doubt his age could do any good to his intentions any further. bjp has leadership issues, but i guess, way better than Mr. Stringed Mohan Saab.

on the gnep, india's plan is tangential in the sense, we are basing it on the thorium fuel cycle chtr, that would be dual use for hydrogen economy of the future. quite contradicting to gnep's fast reactors.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

It looks like a command from someone else telling what to do
Who are these people
EXPRESS EDITORIAL

Sense of the deal
Posted online: Monday, April 28, 2008 at 2319 hrs Print Email
BJP still has a chance to strike a responsible posture on the civil nuclear initiative

The Indian Express

: With another emphatic endorsement of India’s civil nuclear initiative by Brajesh Mishra, who was Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s national security adviser during the six years of NDA rule from 1998-2004, the BJP needs to rethink its opposition. It is no surprise that the ideologically blinkered communists, who were never part of the mainstream on foreign and security policies, have threatened to wreck a historic national initiative. It is deeply regrettable that the BJP, which has championed India’s civil and military nuclear programmes for so long and can take full credit for bringing India out of the atomic closet ten years ago, has chosen to join the Left parties in undermining a deal that was first conceived during Vajpayee’s tenure at the helm.
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Post by Arun_S »

I stand by all my previous statements on Nuclear and Missiles matters, but owing to work pressure as well as heeding to Ramana's directive on the Ban list Warning/Notification, I will not anymore respond to false and libelous statements made by my detractors.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

I believe this series of threads has, in a way, shamed BRF for the kind of insults traded.

Keeping off discussion on this thread but watching events in India, I get the sense that people on one or other side of the nuclear deal issue are going to be disappointed and angry, setting the stage for more heartburn and accusation.

I must admit that it has not been possible for me to intervene actively in either side of the debate without appearing partisan apart from the very real fact that the rhetoric and language blew away any interest I had in the issue. I assumed others were interested - but emails have revealed that many people have been upset with the way this thread has panned out.

With Arun having bowed out I am going to lock this therad and will lock or delete all threads on the issue for about 1 week till emotions on BRF cool down.

After that we could perhaps get some sort of discussion going using norms of civility that were discarded on this thread a long time ago. It might me a good idea to start with the assumption that everyone in India is a traitor or an idiot, or has been bought off, so it will not be necessary to repeat those allegation time and again and stick to what discussion minus description of personal attributes of corrupt people to serve as a bulwark for one's own arguments.
Locked